Ukraine Is Trying to Goad the US into World War III
mtracey.substack.com
mtracey.substack.com
(That’s what I understood)
Russia invaded in 2014 since they couldn't join NATO then and immediately seized Crimea.
I believe the other 2 you are talking about are shale.
Ukraine also has excessive tariffs for anything that flows through its pipeline network, to the extent that Russia will push anything through other networks that is possible to avoid the fees.
...plus many other reasons.
Did you forget about the Ukranian coup that happened days before Russia invaded Crimea? That invasion (justified or not) was clearly in response to the coup, was it not?
Doesn't seem like he had Ukrainian interest in his priority list and considering your response ( justified or not), you were already aware of that.
Since Crimea is not recognized as Russian by Ukraine, then having Ukraine enter NATO means they will immediately be in conflict with the Russians in Crimea, leading to a World War.
Russia will never let Ukraine have nuclear weapons, nor join NATO since it effectively means the same thing. So what is the solution, in your mind?
Who's talking about nuclear weapons, you're reading too much Russian propaganda.
What do you think happens if NATO goes to war with Russia?
This is my understanding of what the "scraps of paper" for denuclearization covered. I don't think NATO membership was addressed. Is there another treaty or commitment you're referring to?
This is false: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30459923
I do believe that Ukraine has done some spectacularly foolish things over the last decade. The U.S. impeached a president over Ukraine; that should have prompted reflection on all sides.
I don't believe that any country should be invaded, but NATO members cannot intervene. Media should stop parroting Ukrainian propaganda and give us all a hard dose of realism, unless we really do want the apocalypse.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/ukraines-de...
Perhaps Russia sees the Ukraine through a similar lens; addressing problems there become more costly with time.
It is a shame that accommodation could not be found, and war averted.
Russia has been for a while, and now stepped up, similarly aggressive rhetoric against Eastern and Central Europe.
-A member of the Ukrainian parliament contributed to the "Steele Dossier" that was used to slander Donald Trump.
-Burisma and Hunter Biden.
-Ukraine pursues NATO membership that Russia will not tolerate.
-Ukrainian membership in the E.U. will do great economic damage to Russia (although what is happening now might be worse).
The background of this "crisis" is not sufficiently explicitly communicated to the public at large. I am not talking about Ukraine vs Russia here. I am talking about ex-USSR and the West, and China and who knows who else silently.
The Russians issued an ultimatum in December 2021, along with treaty proposals for a reset of the security order in Europe and US, addressed to US and NATO. EU was not addressed. The terms of the treaty proposals are a revisionist renegotiation of USSR dissolution and an demand for fulfillment of verbal assurances by the West with USSR. It seems fair to say that Russians knew perfectly well that the West would not accept the terms. US attempted to talk down the terms by offering to start relevant arms negotiations. Russia then proceeded with its "military-technical" response as promised.
Meanwhile back with China, the two other major nuclear great powers published a manifesto of their vision for a new world order. The Russian and Chinese argument (which has been made repeatedly for a long time by officials, organs, propaganda sock puppets, useful idiots, etc.) is that US acts the way it does because it believes no one can tell or make it to stop. And it's officials talk down to them (if you recall the meeting in Alaska) from a presumption of a position of power. As to what their vision is, well, google it. It is not secret.
This "crisis" then is settling the question of 'is a new world order required'?
The mechanism to run the test is Russia acting as if no one can make it or tell it to stop. In other words, Russia is acting as if it has escalation dominance. It has already placed notice that it could interpret non-Ukrainian action to date as an act of war.
The puzzle is why now.
That's the background dynamics (only) as I understand it.
The article is addressing NFZ, arguing that it would lead to WWIII. It side-steps the larger issue discussed above. But nevertheless it does raise a valid point regarding the informational content of public discourse on this matter. Considering the potential import, this needs to be addressed, and corrected.
If indeed the situation is that we're on a runaway train here, then we should publicly start preparing for total war, and sure, have the NFZ as well. This would be agreeing with "we're already in WWIII". But tweeting support is rather short sighted.
Or, we decide that we're not up to total war and WW III, in which case we should read the Russian and Chinese proposal and see if we can live with it. If we can not live with it and/or we believe they'll lose in a war that we will survive, then there is that option.
These are the choices, as far as I can tell. The possibilities add the additional that the Russians et al are really bluffing and things like NFZ or hoping for a quagmire (which ignores who has escalation dominance) will ultimately convince them to back down. And yes, the sanctions too. And yes, squeezing the Chinese, peeling apart alliances, regime changes, are other mid to long term tools. But again, the other side understands about time and stuff.
So that's my take on all this.
Side note: it's impossible to take this writer seriously when he writes an article asking why the West didn't try to negotiate with Putin[1].
He also (pre-emptively) blames WWIII on the Trump/Russia investigation, which is equally insane and/or disingenuous.
1. https://mtracey.substack.com/p/why-wouldnt-the-us-negotiate-...